Construction, Lithologic, and Water-Level Data for Wells Near the Dickson County Landfill, Dickson County, Tennessee, 1995

Transcription

1 Open-File Report Construction, Lithologic, and Water-Level Data for Wells Near the Dickson County Landfill, Dickson County, Tennessee, 1995 Prepared by the U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY in cooperation with DICKSON COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT, DICKSON COUNTY, TENNESSEE

2 Report Documentation Page Form Approved OMB No Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. 1. REPORT DATE REPORT TYPE N/A 3. DATES COVERED - 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Construction, Lithologic, and Water-Level Data for Wells Near the Dickson County Landfill, Dickson County, Tennessee, a. CONTRACT NUMBER 5b. GRANT NUMBER 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER 5e. TASK NUMBER 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) U.S. Department of the Interior 1849 C Street, NW Washington, DC PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR S ACRONYM(S) 12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release, distribution unlimited 13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 14. ABSTRACT 15. SUBJECT TERMS 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR S REPORT NUMBER(S) 16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT SAR a. REPORT unclassified b. ABSTRACT unclassified c. THIS PAGE unclassified 18. NUMBER OF PAGES 22 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18

3 Cover illustration: Graphic by E.G. Baker. i

4 Construction, Lithologic, and Water-Level Data for Wells Near the Dickson County Landfill, Dickson County, Tennessee, 1995 By DAVID E. LADD U.S. GEOLOGICAL Open-File Report SURVEY Prepared in cooperation with DICKSON COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT, DICKSON COUNTY, TENNESSEE Nashville, 1996 Tennessee

5 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm name in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. For additional information write to: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey 810 Broadway, Suite 500 Nashville, Tennessee Copies of this report may be purchased from: U.S. Geological Survey Earth Science Information Center Open-File Reports Section Box 25286, MS 517 Denver Federal Center Denver, Colorado 80225

6 CONTENTS Abstract... Introduction... Description of the study area... Well construction... Lithology... Water-level data... SUIUIUal-y... References cited..... Appendix-Well-construction diagrams and lithology... FIGURES l-3. Maps showing: 1. Location of the study area Location of new monitoring wells installed at the Dickson County landfill, in Tennessee Location and water-level altitudes of measured wells, Dickson County, Tennessee, June 1 and 2, TABLES 1. Construction data for new monitoring wells installed near the Dickson County landfill, in Tennessee Water-level data for wells near the Dickson County landfill, in Tennessee, June 1 and 2, Contents iii

7 CONVERSION FACTORS, VERICAL DATUM, AND WELL-NUMBERING SYSTEM Multiply inch (in.) 25.4 foot (ft) mile (mi) gallon W) gallon per minute (gaymin) microsiemen per centimeter 1 BY To obtain millimeter meter kilometer liter liter per second micromho per centimeter Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit (OF) can be converted to degrees Celsius (OC), and temperature in C to OF, as follows: OF= 1.8 C+32 OC = 5/9(OF - 32) Sea Level: In this report sea level refers to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD of 1929)-a geodetic datum derived from a general adjustment of the first-order level nets of the United States and Canada, formerly called Sea Level Datum of Site-numbering system: The U.S. Geological Survey assigned each site in this report a local Tennessee well number. The local well number is used as a concise label for a site. These numbers are used in addition to site and landfill numbers assigned by the author. The local well number in Tennessee consists of three parts: (1) an abbreviation of the name of the county in which the well is located; (2) a letter designating the 7 1/2minute topographic quadrangle on which the well is plotted; and (3) a number generally indicating the numerical order in which the well was inventoried. The symbol Di:F-89, for example, indicates that the well is located in Dickson County on the F quadrangle and is identified as well 89 in the numerical sequence. Quadrangles are lettered from left to right, beginning in the southwest comer of the county. Iv COfltOfltS

8 Construction, Lithologic, and Water-Level Data for Wells Near the Dickson County Landfill, Dickson County, Tennessee, 1995 /3y David E. Ladd Abstract Organic compounds were detected in water samples collected from Sullivan Spring during several sampling events in Prior to this, the spring was the drinking-water source for two families in the Dickson, Tennessee area. An investigation was conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Dickson County Solid Waste Management, to determine the local ground-water altitudes and to determine if Sullivan Spring is hydraulically downgradient from the Dickson County landfill. This report describes the data collected during the investigation. Five monitoring wells were installed near the northwestern comer of the landfill at points between the landfill and Sullivan Spring. Water-level measurements were made on June 1 and 2, 1995, at these wells and 13 other wells near the landfill to determine ground-water altitudes in the area. Water-level altitudes in the five new monitoring wells and three other landfill-monitoring wells were higher ( to feet) than the altitude of Sullivan Spring (approximately 725 feet). In general, wells in topographically high areas had higher water-level altitudes than Sullivan Spring and wells near streams in lowland areas. INTRODUCTION Organic compounds were detected in water samples collected from Sullivan Spring during several sampling events in Prior to this, the spring was the drinking-water source for two families in the Dickson, Tennessee area. In March, June, and September 1994, water samples were collected from two existing landfill monitoring wells and Sullivan Spring, which is located approximately 0.3 mile northwest of the Dickson County landfill (fig. 1). Levels of trichloroethylene, cis-1,zdichloroethylene, 1,Zdichloroethene, and cis-1,2-dichloroethene were detected in the samples obtained from Sullivan Spring. Water samples were then collected from Worley Furnace Branch upstream and downstream of the spring. These constituents were not detected upstream of Sullivan Spring (Griggs and Maloney, Inc., 1994). An investigation was conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with Dickson County Solid Waste Management, to determine local ground-water altitudes and to determine if Sullivan Spring is hydraulically downgradient from the Dickson County landfill. This investigation was part of an ongoing effort to better understand the hydrology and ground-water interaction at landfills along the Highland Rim physiographic region of Tennessee (Miller, 1974, p. 4-5). Five monitoring wells were installed near the previously unmonitored northwestem comer of the landfill between the landfill and the spring. Water levels were measured in the five new monitoring wells, three existing monitoring wells, and 10 local wells to determine the direction of groundwater flow in the area. This report presents the data collected by the USGS during the course of the investigation. Wellconstruction diagrams and lithologic logs for the five new monitoring wells are included. Water-level altitudes and locations of all wells used in the study are reported. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA The study area includes the Dickson County landfill and adjacent areas. The landfill lies approximately 1.5 miles southwest of the city of Dickson, Description of thd Study Area 1 --.

9 TENNESSEE 36-W digital line graph. 1: 100,fX~O 2 MILES KILOMETERS Figure 1. Location of the study area. 2 Construction, Lithokgic, and Water-Level Data for Wells Near the Dickson Covnty Landfill, Dickson County, Tennessee, 1995

10 Tennessee. The surface drainage in the area of the landfill is mostly northwest to Worley Furnace Branch, but some of the surface drainage is to the south to Baker Branch. Worley Furnace Branch and Baker Branch discharge to the West Piney River (fig. 1). Sullivan Spring, which feeds Worley Furnace Branch, lies approximately 0.3 mile northwest of the landfill. Parts of the landfill stand more than 120 feet higher than the spring and Worley Furnace Branch. The Dickson County landfill lies on the western Highland Rim physiographic region (Miller, 1974, p. 4-5). The geologic formations in the area of the landfill are Mississippian carbonates. They include, in descending order, the St. Louis Limestone, the Warsaw Limestone, and the Fort Payne Formation. WELL CONSTRUCTION Five monitoring wells were installed near the northwestern comer of the Dickson County landfill using standard air-rotary drilling technique (fig. 2). Wells 2 and 3 and wells 4 and 5 (fig. 2) form closely spaced well pairs containing a shallow and a deep well. The two shallow wells (2 and 4) were screened in the first water-yielding zone in regolith. In the three deep wells (1,3, and 5), the regolith was cased off, and the wells were screened in a water-yielding zone in bedrock. In each well, an 8.75inch-diameter hole was drilled in regolith. In each deep well, the 8.75-inchdiameter hole was drilled about 5 feet into bedrock, and 6-inch-diameter steel casing was placed in the hole. In each deep well, except MW6-R-01, the casing was sealed at the bottom by displacement with a cement/bentonite mixture to fill the entire annular space around the steel casing under ideal conditions. In MW6-R-01, the first well drilled during the study, only about 55 gallons of grout/hentonite mix was displaced into the annular space around the steel casing. Any unfilled annular space was filled with cuttings. After the cement/hentonite mixture was allowed to harden for at least 24 hours, a 6-inch-diameter hole was drilled through the mixture and into bedrock. All of the new monitoring wells were installed with 2-inch-diameter polyvinylchloride (PVC) casing and a O.OlO-inch slotted screen. In each well, except MW8-R-02, a sand pack was installed in the annular space around the screen from the bottom of the hole to at least 2 feet above the top of the screen. A bentonite seal at least 2 feet thick was placed above the sand pack. A cement/bentonite mixture was installed in the annular space around the 2-inch-diameter PVC casing from the top of the bentonite seal to land surface. Due to a large void encountered near the bottom of well MW8-R-02, a sand pack could not be placed around the screen. Instead, a PVC bushing was placed above the void, and the well was completed with a bentonite seal, a cement seal, and cement/hentonite grout. Wellconstruction information is included in table 1, and well-construction diagrams are included in the appendix. Table 1. Construction data for new monitoring wells installed near the Dickson County landfill, in Tennessee [Land-surface altitudes were determined by leveling to the top of well casings and subtracting height of above-ground casing intervals] Well number Location Altitude of rfdmyzef; Latitude Longitude Site USGS Landfill 0 *. 0 I sea level Depth of well in feet k --- eww land sur.,,, tan* ~^-^--~ Interval, In feet I, JGilnllcu \ Date of construction Di:F-89 MW6-R l25i95 Di:F-90 MW7-SH Di:F-91 MW8-R Di:F-92 MW9-SH iO8l95 Di:F-93 MWIO-R /3ol95 Well Construction 3

11 II ::::-\ L g m 4 Construction, Lithologic, and Water-Level Data for Wells Near the Dickson County Landfill, Dickson County, Tennessee, 1995

12 LITHOLOGY Geologic samples were collected at 5- to lo-foot intervals during well construction. A log was kept during drilling describing the lithology at each well. Lithologic logs of each well drilled are shown in the appendix. Lithology encountered during drilling included clay, chert, and limestone. Regolith encountered was generally clay and chert gravel, with some limestone and chert boulders. Lithology encountered at top of bedrock generally was fine- to coarse-grained limestone, limestone and chert, or occasional silty limestone. Coarse- to very coarse-grained limestone was encountered near the bottom of each deep well. WATER-LEVEL DATA Water-level measurements were made on June 1 and 2, 1995, at 18 wells in the Dickson County landfill area (fig. 3). These wells include four local domestic wells, six wells owned by the city of Dickson, three existing landfill-monitoring wells, and the five new monitoring wells. Water-level altitudes were determined by using an electric tape to measure, to the nearest 0.01 foot, the distance from land surface to the top of the water column in each well, then subtracting this distance from the land-surface altitude of the well. Land-surface altitudes of landfill-monitoring wells were leveled to the nearest 0.01 foot. Land-surface altitudes for all other wells were determined from a 1:24,000-scale topographic map with a 20-foot contour interval. Well depths for the five new monitoring wells were obtained from construction logs. Well depths for other wells were determined by measuring to the nearest 0.5 foot unless otherwise noted in table 2. The altitude of Sullivan Spring (approximately 725 feet), was lower and hydraulically downgradient from water-level altitudes in all of the monitoring wells at the landfill (ranging from to feet). In general, water-level altitudes in wells in the eastern part of the study area were higher than those in the western part of the study area (fig. 3 and table 2). Also, wells in topographically high areas had higher water-level altitudes than wells near major streams. Water-level altitudes ranged from feet (well 12) to feet (well 17). The water level in well 17, however, was a pumping level and did not represent a static water level. The next lowest water- level altitude was feet (well 18, the westemmost well measured during the study). Water-level altitudes for all wells measured during the study area are shown in figure 3. SUMMARY An investigation was conducted by the USGS, in cooperation with Dickson County Solid Waste Management, to determine the local ground-water altitudes and to determine if Sullivan Spring, approximately 0.3 mile northwest of the Dickson County landfill, Tennessee, is hydraulically downgradient from the landfill. As part of this investigation, five monitoring wells were installed near the northwestern comer of the landfill. Water-level measurements were made on June 1 and 2, 1995, from these wells and 13 other wells near the landfill. Water-level altitudes in all of the monitoring wells at the landfill (ranging from to feet) were higher than and hydraulically upgradient from Sullivan Spring (approximately 725 feet). In general, water-level altitudes in wells in the eastern part of the study area were higher than those in the western part of the study area. Also, wells in topographically high areas had higher water-level altitudes than wells near major streams. Water-level altitudes ranged from feet (well 12) to feet (well 17). The water level in well 17, however, was a pumping level and did not represent a static water level. The next lowest water-level altitude was feet (well 18, the westernmost well measured during the study). REFERENCES CITED Bradley, M.W., 1984, Ground water in the Dickson area of the western Highland Rim of Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report ,42 p. Griggs and Maloney, Inc., 1994, Groundwater quality assessment plan, Dickson County landfill, Dickson County, Tennessee: File number , Groundwater assessment report, July 25-26, 1995, Dickson County landfill, Dickson County, Tennessee: File number Miller, R.A., 1974, The geologic history of Tennessee: Tennessee Division of Geology Bulletin 74,63 p. References Cited 5

13 6 Construction, Lithologic, and Water-Level Data for Wells Near the Dickson County Landfill, Dickson County, Tennessee, 1995

14 Table 2 7

15 APPENDIX Well-construction diagrams and lithology EXPLANATION WELL-CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAMS FOR WELLS COMPLETED IN ROCK O k 3 g LAND-SURFACE ~ ALTITUDE, IN FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL 8,75-INCH-DIAMETER HOLE 6-INCH-DIAMETER HOLE LAND SURFACE ANNULUS, BACKFILLED WITH CUTTINGS AND SLUMPAGE 6-INCH-DIAMETER STEEL CASING CEMENT GROUT/BENTONITE SEAL FOR STEEL CASING (THICKNESS ESTIMATED) 2-INCH-DIAMETER PVC CASING ANNULUS AROUND 2-INCH- DIAMETER PVC CASING, BACKFILLED WITH CEMENT GROUT/BENTONITE MIX SCREENED INTERVAL, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE TOTAL DEPTH DRILLED, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE r 87 L I.. I BENTONITE SEAL 2-INCH-DIAMETER PVC SCREEN SAND PACK BOREHOLE, BACKFILLED WITH SLUMPAGE AND CUTTINGS Appendix 9

16 EXPLANATION WELL-CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAMS FOR WELLS COMPLETED IN REGOLITH LAND-SURFACE ALTITUDE, IN FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL LAND SURFACE 2-INCH-DIAMETER PVC CASING 8.75INCH-DIAMETER HOLE ANNULUS, BACKFILLED WlTH CEMENT GROUT/BENTONITE MIX -80.L SCREENED INTERVAL, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE TOTAL DEPTH DRILLED, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE BENTONITE SEAL 2-INCH-DIAMETER PVC SCREEN SAND PACK INITIAL BOREHOLE, BACK- FILLED WlTH SLUMPAGE AND CUlllNGS 10 Construction, Lithologic, and Water-Level Data for Wells Near the Dickson County Landfill, Dickson County, Tennessee, 1995

17 EXPLANATION LITHOLOGY CLAY AND CHERT GRAVEL A A AA A A CHERT LIMESTONE AND CHERT LIMESTONE VOID YlELD - ESTlMATED YIELD OF WATER-YIELDING ZONE IN GALLONS PER MINUTE (GAL/MIN) SpC - SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE IN MICROSIEMENS PER CENTIMETER AT 26CELSIUS OF WATER ENCOUNTERED DURING DRILLING Appendix 11

18 MW6-R-O LITHOLOGY AND GEOLOGISTS CLAY AND CHERT GRAVEL B -60 & $ m I E I k E -120 LIMESTONE AND CHERT, WITH CLAY ZONES AND VOIDS, CLAY ZONE BELOW 105 FEET CONTAINS LIME- STONE AND CHERT GRAVEL TOP OF ROCK AT 109 FEET. FINE-GRAINED SILTY LIMESTONE AND CHERT COARSE-GRAINED, FOSSIL- RICH LIMESTONE WATER-MELDING INTERVAL(S) AT UNDETERMINED DEPTHS BETWEEN 162 AND 183 FEET. YIELD - 1 GAt/MlN SpC US/CM -180 I Construction, Lithologic, and Water-Level Data for Wells Near the Dickson County Landfill, Dickson County, Tennessee, 1995

19 MW7-SH-02 LITHOLOGY AND GEOLOGIST S g -20 is CtAY AND CHERT GRAVEL, WITH ISOLATED layers OF CHERT AND FOSSIL FRAG- MENTS, AND LIMESTONE AND CHERT WITH SOME FOSSIL FRAGMENTS is ii L Lu -60 LL z E EJ n -80 I -- WATER-MELDING ZONE NEAR 98 FEET. YlELD - 5 GAUMIN -1oc) ,- i SpC US/CM TOP OF ROCK AT 103 FEET. DARK, FOSSILIFEROUS \ LIMESTONE AND CHERT Appendix 13

20 MW8-R-02 0 I LITHOLOGY AND GEOLOGISB LOG -20 I I -- CLAY AND CHERT GRAVEL l -- BROKEN-L-I? FOSSIL-RICH LIME- STONE AND CHERT TOP OF ROCK AT 82 FEET, FINE- TO MEDIUM-GRAINED, FOSSIL- RICH SILTY LIMESTONE, WlTH LAYERS OF LIMESTONE AND CHER BROKEN UP FROM 98 TO 99 FEET NO RETURNS I -- I -- MEDIUM-GRAINED, FOSSIL- RICH LIMESTONE AND CHERT, BROKEN UP BELOW l / WATER-YIELDING VOID YlELD GALJvllN SEC.256 US/CM MUD NEAR BOTTOM OF VOID 14 Construction, Lithologic, and Water-Level Data for Wells Near the Dickson County Landfill, Dickson County, Tennessee, 1995

21 MW9-SH LITHOLOGY AND GEOLOGISTS - ET kl- - A- M -- I- 4 L i& (-j- 07,5 CLAY AND CHERT GRAVEL, WITH ISOLATED ZONES OF CHERT RUBBLE - i - - WATER-YIELDING ZONE FROM 78 TO 80 FEET. YIELD - 20 GAt/MlN SpC US/CM Appendix 15

22 MWl O-R-03 0 T LITHOLOGY AND GEOLOGISTS -20 I O-96 CtAY AND CHERT GRAVEL WATER-YELDINGZONEAl96 FEET. MELD- 15GALIdlN I I / TOP OF ROCK AT 96 FEET. FINE- TO MEDIUM-GRAlNED LIME STONF MTH FOSSIL FRAGMFNTS FINE- AND MEDIUM- GRAlNED LIMESTONE AND \ CHERT, WlTH FOSSIL \ FRAGMENTS FINE- TO COARSE-GRAINED \ LIMESTONE AND SILTY \ LIMESTONE MEDIUM-GRAINED LIMESTONE WITH SOME FOSSIL FRAGMENTS \ SMALL WATER-YIELDINGVOID ATl38FEET. \ MELD- < 1 GAUMIN IlWJSlTlON TO COARSE- TO VER\ COARSE-GRAINED, FOSSIL-RICH LIMESTONE WATER-YlELDINGINlERVAl(S) FROM140TO162FEET. YIELD- < 1 GAl/?dlN 16 Construction, Liihologic, and Water-Level Data for Wells Near the Dickson County Landfill, Dickson County, Tennessee, 1995

23